When Will Hillary Rodham Clinton Crack?
Hillary Rodham Clinton paraded Bill continuously around the country for campaign events to raise the big cash like that of Norman Hsu and to win over voters with her husband’s popularity among registered Democrats. But like she does on most issues Hillary wants to have it both ways. She wants you to remember anything positive, as her campaign crafts the message, and forget anything negative of which there is a great deal.
But it was Biden’s remark that laid bare a central quandary about Hillary Clinton’s candidacy: whether she can justifiably take credit for her husband’s successes while sidestepping the controversies and lingering questions that make some voters wary of another Clinton presidency.
“Bill Clinton had a big role tonight — he got more time in the debate than some of the candidates,” Democratic strategist Dan Newman said. “His presidency is a critical part of both Hillary’s experience argument and Obama’s argument about the need for change.”
But Clinton distanced herself from her husband as well, most notably when asked if she would ever approve torturing a suspected terrorist to prevent the detonation of a “big bomb.” She said no, but moderator Tim Russert pointed out Bill Clinton had proposed such a possibility in an interview last year.
There is plenty of reason to disagree with an opinion expressed at The Nation, referenced below, but if it represents the thinking of liberal voters it may show another chink in the Clinton armor as we wait for her to crack under pressure.
Clinton’s Real (Wrong) Politik
“I don’t believe it’s in the best interests of our country to give the United Nations what amounts to a veto,” responded Clinton.
That’s the wrong answer — way wrong. In fact, it is as wrong as anything George Bush or Dick Cheney has said about presidential war making powers.
The title from the Boston Globe piece below is a reminder of Clinton’s need to woo the fringe left antiwar base of the Democratic party and her reputation for being cold, distant and not in tune with anything other than her political ambitions. Not unlike her lame attempt at a Southern accent to appeal to voters at a civil rights memorial or her tentative handling of the Hsu scandal or embrace of lobbyists as real Americans.
Clinton lacking the emotion of her base
By Peter S. Canellos, Globe Staff
September 27, 2007
When master inquisitor Tim Russert tried to pin her down on a tough question about Israel possibly attacking Iran, she batted him away with an easy, “Tim, I think that’s one of those hypotheticals that’s better not addressed.”
News for Hillary and the Boston Globe, most topics and scenarios discussed within a debate are hypothetical. Perhaps borrowing a common phrase like not taking options off the table or that decisions cannot be made in advance would have been more reassuring. Dodging questions by describing them as hypothetical is a cop out.
The Globe’s appraisal of Clinton’s skills in debates is, well, debatable. If staying on message is one’s opinion of a skilled performance in debate then sidestepping the tough questions and not addressing what the fringe left base wants may support the Globe’s opinion of Clinton’s abilities. Likewise the following excerpt may be very much on point.
Probably the most common and frequently discussed problem with Hillary Clinton is again her refusal to admit the wrongdoing and her willing participation in poor decisions by her husband during his Presidency. She will continue to tout any success and deny or distance herself from the failures in hopes no one will notice or we tire of demanding answers.
Clinton defends husband’s record, sets self apart
Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:42am EDT
HANOVER, New Hampshire (Reuters) - Sen. Hillary Clinton, put on the spot in a U.S. presidential debate on Wednesday over her husband’s White House record, declared she was running on her own and freely disagreed with her spouse.
Good luck convincing anyone outside the fringe left Democratic base or those who always vote party that Hillary Rodham Clinton is only good and has no bad. Just like everyone else on the planet there are both sides to HRC and her refusal to deal with it honestly may be her undoing. Just sit back and wait for her to crack under the strain of all the baggage. We should wait to see if her strategist, Mark Penn, is correct about every candidate must face a campaign ending event before the fat lady sings. Hillary’s hasn’t shown up yet but with any luck it will.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Trackposted to Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, The Random Yak, DeMediacratic Nation, Big Dog’s Weblog, Right Truth, The Pet Haven Blog, Nuke’s News & Views, Webloggin, Cao’s Blog, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, , Conservative Cat, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, Public Eye, The Yankee Sailor, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
She won’t. This is a woman whose been handling this stuff at world series level for 20 years. Her composure and competence are obvious to all, whether you hate her or love her, and in a week when we have a press sec at the WH dancing around explaining why they have to have phonetic spellings in Bush’s speeches is it surprising the country is gravitating to towards the competence candidate. There’s no doubt she’s going to be the nominee and a high probability, around a 60% chance I’d say, she’s going to win the presidency.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Two comments–
(1) re: “Just like everyone else on the planet there are both sides to HRC and her refusal to deal with it honestly may be her undoing.”
I don’t think HRC or her supporters think she’s perfect. She and we think she’s competent. Nothing you’ve posted addresses her obvious competence.
Seriously, Clinton Haters are just getting to be boring.
For example, you imply something about Hsu here. What did Clinton do? She accepted money from a contributor who is now in prison, just like many, many Republicans accepted donations from Jack Abramoff, who is now in prison.
Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney, etc. joined Jack Abramoff in prison.
George Bush did not.
Why not? Because Cunningham did something wrong, and Bush didn’t.
So… in the interst of fairness, why do you even mention Hsu? Did Clinton do something different with Hsu from what GWB did regarding Abramoff? Otherwise, tossing Hsu’s name around only works with Clinton Haters, because of their obvious gullibility and utter hypocrisy. It’s simply not going to work for the 2008 Thumpin’.
(2) re: “Just sit back and wait for her to crack under the strain of all the baggage.”
What does this even mean?
The “baggage” you claim that she has is boring drivel, only a concern to the exact same people who think Bush is still doing a heckuva job.
I think Clinton Haters over-inflate how much the rest of us care about what Clinton Haters continue to screech about.
When President Clinton left office, 70% of the nation thought we were going in the right direction.
Compare that to today’s sentiments, under the “leadership” of GWB and the GOP.
So… what “baggage” are you referring to?
That Vince Foster was “murdered”?
Maybe if the GOP Congress hadn’t spend millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of taxpayer dollars on THREE investigations, to find out that THAT kind of “baggage” is complete and utter bu**sh**, well, the “baggage” crap might have some traction.
But since Clinton is leading every single Republican Presidential candidate in the polls, and trending upwards, I think the Clinton Haters are instead just stuck in the MUD.
No, I really, really doubt Clinton is going to crack under “the weight” of “the baggage.”
The “baggage” is just a bunch of empty illusions we’ve already heard for more than a decade, dreamt up by people who don’t care about competent government, smaller government, balanced budgets, smart Iraq Wars, smart regime changes of rogue dictators, African-Americans, Hispanics, or poor children who don’t have healthcare.
September 27th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Welcome back, Jan, kinda missed ya.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Back in 1969 a group of Black Panthers decided that a fellow black panther named Alex Rackley needed to die. Rakely was suspected of disloyalty. Raclkley was first tied to a chair. Once safely immobilized, his friends tortured him for hours by, among other things, pouring boiling water on him.
When they got tired of torturing Rackley, Black Panther member Warren Kimbo took Rackley outside and put a bullet in his head. Rackley’s body was later found floating in a river about 25 miles north of New Haven, Conn.
Perhaps at this point you’re curios as to what happened to these Black Panthers. In 1977, that’s only eight years later, only one of the killers was still in jail. The shooter, Warren Kimbro, managed to get a scholarship to Harvard, and became good friends with none other than Al Gore. He later became an assistant dean at an Eastern Connecticut State College. Isn’t that something?
As a 60’s radical you can pump a bullet into someone’s head, and a few years later, in the same state, you can become an assistant college dean! Only in American!
Erica Huggins was the lady who served the Panthers by boiling the water for Mr. Rackley’s torture. Some years later Ms. Huggins was elected to a California School Board.
How in the world do you think these killers got off so easy? Maybe it was in some part due to the efforts of two people who came to her defense of the Panthers. These two people actually went so far as to shut down Yale University with demonstrations in defense of the accused Black Panthers during their trial.
One of these people was none other than Bill Lan Lee. Mr. Lee, or Mr. Lan Lee, as the case may be, isn’t a college dean. He isn’t a member of a California School Board. He was, however, head of the US Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, appointed by none other than Bill Clinton.
O.K., so who was the other Panther defender? Is this other notable Panther defender now a school board member? Is this other Panther apologist now an assistant college dean? No, neither! The other Panther defender was, like Lee, a radical law student at Yale University at the time. She is now known as the “Smartest Woman in the World.”.. She is none other than the Democratic senator from the State of New York—our former First Lady, the incredible Hillary Rodham Clinton.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Thank you, Mr. Matthews. I like your mind.
(1) So… in the interst of fairness, why do you even mention Hsu?
(2) So… what “baggage” are you referring to?
(p.s. Do you come to the same conclusion that I do, that Mr. Rockyspoon thinks America’s system of justice is a just a piece of crap?)
September 27th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Jan:
on number one, Hsu is a reminder of more examples like Willie Tan and other campaign cash practices.
on number two the list is long e.g., whitewater, travel gate, china gate, lying to Congress, sex scandals, etc.
I think rockyspoon is pointing out additional connections between the clinton clan and some unsavory people or events of which I am unfamiliar.
aside from the obvious reasons, I bring up ‘baggage’ that includes Bill since this would be a two for one package, not like you get one without the other. Also, it appears Clinton supporters are willing to give Hillary Rodham Clinton a pass on misdeeds, mistakes or whatever you would like to call them.
BTW, thanks to everyone for stoppin’ by and takin’ time to post comments.
September 27th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
Apologies… I am a casual ‘drop in’ here. But,
Jan:
I’ve been watching the Clinton’s since their Arkansas days. Lived in N. Louisiana and spent a lot of (wonderful) time camping around the Hot Springs area. I was shocked when Clinton won the nomination in 1992, and floored with the election results. That’s politics.
Hillary Crack? I think so. Is she as well thought of as you say? I don’t think so - The polls show show is one of the most polarizing candidates in memory, and this is before the 2008 campaign has begun. And given the current state of accepted practice for “hate-politics” against Bush, Hillary will naturally be subjected to the same level. 2008 is going to be brutal. When she gets hit really hard (not the footsy going on now) her arrogance & temper will come out. And she is really vulnerable, due to flip-flops, shallowness, and overall “Hillary first, everyone else second” attitudes.
Obviously I am not a Hillary fan - Arkansas cured me of that earlyon. And I wish our politics were more civil - the last 8 years cured me of that. Soo, all I can think of is, good luck to us all!
September 27th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Bill Sanford:
There are no formal drop-ins here so casual works.
September 27th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Well, I think you made my point regarding Clinton Haters.
You said: “on number one, Hsu is a reminder of more examples like Willie Tan and other campaign cash practices.”
See, Hsu doesn’t remind anyone (except Clinton Haters) of ANYTHING.
Right now, today, in 2007, in the rest of America, “other campaign cash practices” involves a man named Jack Abramoff.
It’s almost as if Jack Abramoff doesn’t exist as far as Republicans are concerned.
You Republicans are still talking about, what, 1996 or something?
In *2006* (just one year ago, not one DECADE ago) there were Republican Congressmen AND officials in the Bush adminstration who went to prison for “other campaign cash practices.”
And, as I type, more (plural) are being investigated.
Do Clinton Haters know as much about Jack Abramoff as they do Willie Tan?
It doesn’t seem like they do.
Do they understand that, in the minds of America, no one knows who some guy named Willie Tan is? But Americans DO know that Jack Abramoff is STILL going to be a part of the 2008 elections, because he’s STILL singing!
Do you think you gave me a fair answer on why you are calling Clinton out on Hsu but not calling Bush out on Abramoff?
They did the exact same thing — they both accepted campaign contributions from someone who went to prison.
Both innocent? Both guilty? Which is it?
——
You said: “on number two the list is long e.g., whitewater, travel gate, china gate, lying to Congress, sex scandals, etc.”
Puh-leez!
Again, Americans remember that the Republican Congress spent millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of their taxpayer dollars on Whitewater, Travel gate… blah-blah-blah gate.
And they didn’t like it!!!
Clinton Haters appear to believe that they GAINED something with voters during Blah-blah-blah-gate.
THEY DIDN’T.
FACT: Clinton’s approval numbers sky-rocketed during Blahblahblah-gate! And they haven’t ever come down since!!!
So… That’s “baggage”??????
Jeesh.
September 27th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
And for Bill Sanford,
You called former First lady and United States Senator Hillary Clinton this:
“Hillary Crack”
And then you pleaded in the exact same post for this:
“I wish our politics were more civil.”
And you expect me to have a serious conversation with you?
Sorry, no.
September 27th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
Jan, I believe what Bill Sanford wrote was “Hillary Crack?” The question mark implies that he was writing shorthand for “Will Hillary crack?”
September 27th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
If you are correct, my apologies. The capital C in Crack threw me off.
Well…
Then my response to Mr. Sanford is, “Okay. It’s a free country. Don’t vote for her.”
September 27th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
Be still my heart, DragonLady has returned
Hey, Jan, does that mean if the misdeed or transgression is far enough in the past we’re supposed to forget about it? You can’t be serious.
Who are you addressing when you say ‘you Republicans’?
BTW, one of my most disappointing political moments was when Duke Cunningham fell from grace. If you are familiar with his bio, you might be disappointed too.
I still get cranked when I remember Watergate. You know, the one they use the ending for in Travelgate, Chinagate and the others. I get upset when anyone crosses the line regardless of party.
I have voted for Dems and the GOP so I guess I’m not what you would call a party voter.
I’m not to crazy about Jimmy Carter now, but I voted for him in 76 and was impressed with his work in the Middle East then, not so much now.
My opposition to the Clinton’s has nothing to do with party.
Other matters need to be attended to so for now I must stop.
Keep this going as long as you want, I’m enjoying it.
September 27th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Uh, folks, especially DragonLady, to be sure, I was writing quickly and directly. Ms. DragonLady was absolutely correct in her understanding, and I thank her for clarifying my statement.
Hard to participate in discussions when one is having to work for a living. Sigh. Retirement in a few more years - yes!
I am a long time Republican, and was part of the ‘Reagan Revolution’ in North Louisiana back in the 70;s & 80’s. It was fun watching Democrats turn Republican. Actually, Republicans didn’t have to do much; Carter and the Democratic Congress were the best arguments we Republicans could put up to convert voters.
30 years later, and I still enjoy watching politics. One good thing I could mention about Hillary is that she comes across as one of the ‘old Democrats’ (this is not a slam on Hillary). It is hard to get a fix on where she is on positions at any given time, but she is generally within, or close to, a middle range. The new generation of moveon.org politicians I find scary. They appear to be out for national control, and it is hard to figure out where they will stop.
I’d better get back to work. Thanks folks.
September 27th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
Thanks for the info Bill. Now when I have a chance to actually reread all these comments the chance that it will all be understood has improved.
(retirement, that sounds good)
September 28th, 2007 at 12:26 am
Gratitude abounds…
Back to those verses, though. They say very much and give so much insight to the many seemingly unanswered questions we have of God. The answers can be found in this Bible and in these verses. Why does evil happen? Because we have turned away from Go…..
September 28th, 2007 at 1:11 am
[…] …NOW THE QUESTIONS BEGINRobert on UPDATE: UAW BACK TO WORK …NOW THE QUESTIONS BEGINRobert on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?BonBon on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?BonBon on The Soros Threat ToMiller Brewing Portrayed Christ and His Disciples as Half-Naked Homosexual Sadomasochists Robert on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?Robert on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty,Dem groupSan Francisco Liberal on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?San Francisco Liberal on UPDATE: UAW BACK TO WORK …NOW THE QUESTIONS BEGINBlog @ MoreWhat.com» Blog Archive » When Will Hillary Rodham Clinton Crack? on Linkfest: Miller Brewing Portrayed Christ and His Disciples as Half-Naked Homosexual Sadomasochists PCD on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty, defunct Dem groupPam on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty, defunct Dem groupPCD on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty, defunct Dem group […]
September 28th, 2007 at 1:11 am
[…] …NOW THE QUESTIONS BEGINRobert on UPDATE: UAW BACK TO WORK …NOW THE QUESTIONS BEGINRobert on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?BonBon on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?BonBon on The Soros Threat ToMiller Brewing Portrayed Christ and His Disciples as Half-Naked Homosexual Sadomasochists Robert on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?Robert on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty,Dem groupSan Francisco Liberal on Top 3 Democratic Hopefuls Won’t Commit To Withdrawl In Iraq?San Francisco Liberal on UPDATE: UAW BACK TO WORK …NOW THE QUESTIONS BEGINBlog @ MoreWhat.com» Blog Archive » When Will Hillary Rodham Clinton Crack? on Linkfest: Miller Brewing Portrayed Christ and His Disciples as Half-Naked Homosexual Sadomasochists PCD on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty, defunct Dem groupPam on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty, defunct Dem groupPCD on The Soros Threat To Democracy..UPDATE AND BUMP: Hillary Rodham $oros tied to dirty, defunct Dem group […]
September 28th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
LOL Stanford. I’ve been away too long, from many of my old haunts.
I’m trying to force myself out of my blogging funk.
No problem Bill.
September 28th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
Thanks.
I noticed that you still didn’t answer my questions.
Are H Clinton and GW Bush both innocent, or both guilty, or only H Clinton is guilty of something, in terms of Hsu and Abramoff?
What’s the “baggage” you claim the Clintons have (except for the Clinton Haters)?
Again, President Clinton left office with 70% of the country thinking we were going in the right direction! To this day, hius approval ratings are sky-high. She’s won election twice in NY — the last time with over 65% of the vote!
Listen, if remembering all this “baggage” helps your spirit, I’m not here to stop you.
I’m just here to ask question about what you call Truth.
Best wishes!
September 30th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
With the press behind Hillary like it is, don’t expect her to crack at all.
She has the Tinfoil hat on and it’s going to be very hard to penetrate it.
October 1st, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Sorry Jan, just noticed now that there were more comments, much to my surprise. If you read this note, let me know if you still wants a response or if it is too late for this post.
October 1st, 2007 at 8:08 pm
Where are my manners? Welcome DD2. I don’t know if it is entirely the press but HRC seems to have a teflon coating.